dismissedDEC262023_02B52032023-12-26 · appeal · Texas Service Center

This is an AAO appeal decision — a case denied once and appealed. It shows how the framework is applied; it is not the filing population.

The Petitioner, a medical health services manager, proposed to open and run her own home health care company providing companion, personal, and palliative care services, initially planning to expand via franchise across Florida.

Field: home health care · Read the decision (uscis.gov)

EB-2 threshold — not met

AAO found Petitioner did not establish 10 years of full-time experience (only ~9 years 7 months per original filing), and rejected a revised start date submitted in response to RFE as an impermissible material change under Matter of Izummi. Also failed the salary, membership, and recognition criteria. However, AAO reserved final determination on EB-2 classification since NIW eligibility was dispositive.

Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive

“the relevant question is not the importance of the industry or profession in which the individual will work”

“such evidence does not establish how the Petitioner's specific proposed endeavor, as a medical health services manager of her own home health services company stands to impact the broader field or otherwise establish its national importance”

“the record does not establish how the Petitioner's specific endeavor would affect the regional or national economy to reach the level of "substantial positive economic effects"”

“the Petitioner has not provided sufficient documentary evidence to show that her proposed endeavor would impact the home health care industry more broadly rather than benefiting those she proposes to directly serve”

“much of the content of the expert opinion letter lacked probative value with respect to the national importance of the Petitioner's proposed endeavor”

AAO decision text

How the evidence was treated

business plan · discounted
“evidence of the importance of the industry or profession in general does not satisfy the standard of national importance”
AAO decision text
resume experience · discounted
“a petitioner may not make material changes to a petition that has already been filed in an effort to make a deficient petition conform to USCIS requirements”
AAO decision text
recommendation letter · discounted
“much of the content of the expert opinion letter lacked probative value with respect to the national importance of the Petitioner's proposed endeavor”
AAO decision text
certification membership · discounted

Where this case turned

Business plan speculative · p1 — projections without a documented basis or steps
Economic claims unsupported · p1 — job/revenue projections with no corroborating basis
Field importance conflated with endeavor · p1 — argues the field matters, not the specific endeavor
Letters conclusory · p1 — letters praise skills in general terms without tracing specific impact
Local, not national scope · p1 — impact confined to clients / a region

1,312coded decisions carry the failure named in this record. A placement shows where your profile sits among them, not what it predicts.See where your profile sits — 90 seconds →

Notable

AAO applied a material-change/impermissible-amendment analysis (Matter of Izummi) twice: once to reject a revised employment start date offered to cure the exceptional-ability experience deficiency, and again to reject an expanded (nationwide vs. Florida-only) franchise plan submitted on appeal, evaluating the endeavor only as originally filed. AAO reserved the EB-2 exceptional-ability classification determination despite finding the experience criterion unmet, since the NIW denial was dispositive.

Authorities this decision leans on

From the doctrinal survivor set — 187 authority tests across 47 distinct authorities cleared the differential-lift gates. Only those appear here.

8 C.F.R. 103.2(b)(1)
Matter of Caron Int'l
Matter of D-R-
Matter of Izummi
Matter of L-A-C-
Poursina v. USCIS

Cases in adjacent profiles

← Back to the case explorer